|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
People's Front of Judea

Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Location: Seoul. Korea
|
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, thanks for the vote of confidence Hojucandy and Skinhead. Yeah, I've been reading Dave's forums for quite some time. I finally got off my lazy butt and joined last December. Though you guys don't know me from Adam, I have usually kept up with the helpful and sometimes humorous posts (I believe since 2001) made here by regular members. Thanks for the welcome.
By the way, I like your avatar Hojucandy. Sponge Bob rocks!
| Hojucandy wrote: |
| if i went around telling people that they are sinners i should be stopped. and that is what evangelists do. if they got around telling people that they are wonderful i would not object but that is not what they do... if missionaries really did spread liove and understanding that would be great - but they don't. they spread division and guilt. they are no better than the kkk. |
Good points. It seems that they come as missionaries in the name of love, but under that veil (or sometimes revealed initially) they bring a lot of hate against those who disagree with them or those who are different. Though it's a stretch, maybe some of them should have a social label as some kind of pseudo-hate group.
| Hojucandy wrote: |
| should christian missionaries be allowed to get around the world telling people that the way they live is wrong and they should change it? our society can barely cope with it. uneducated people and members of less-developed societies are duped by these people and unwittingly fall into a narrow condemming world view that eats away at their own unique culture. |
I think Chinua Achebe, author of Things Fall Apart, would definitely agree with you. Though this may be an extreme example, many Christian missionaries in Central America use "Teaching English" in Christian schools for the poor as bait to lure in new converts (whether or not these locals internalize their views or just pretend to for the sake of English education). The Muslims in West Africa are just as bad condemning local indigenous religious ceremonies (like the masking dances and festivals of the Yoruba, Fon, Ewe). They complain about all the iconography, which is taboo to their beliefs. Oh well, missionaries suck in general.
What's funny to me is how the protestant missionaries are trying to convert the catholics in Latin America (Ultimate irony on many levels). Funny stuff. Sad really.
Even funnier was the time I visited a Presbyterian church here in Seoul with a somewhat devout Korean friend. The youth department of the church was planning to set up missions in surburban California neighborhoods to "spead the Word." I thought, "How cool! Those who were missionized during and after the Korean War (perhaps earlier) now plan to return the favor at the doorsteps of some of the original missionaries from America." Yeah, that might go over well with the local ministers trying to missionize the same neighborhoods. Maybe it will lead to a religious gang warfare, ha ha! Maybe they can combine their efforts and together try to missionize the Presbyterians in Scotland, or maybe even Switzerland. Hey, might as well go to the source!
Anyway, it still sucks to be accosted by the religious freaks at home or abroad. I wonder if they ever feel uncomfortable with what they do, like an unconfident salesperson not comfortable with their intrusive role, thus thinking about a career change? I had two Mormon friends in high school who absolutely dreaded the thought of spending 2 years as a missionary when they graduated. I only way I am going on a mission is if there are crab burgers involved. Cheers! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kermo

Joined: 01 Sep 2004 Location: Eating eggs, with a comb, out of a shoe.
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
I think Chinua Achebe, author of Things Fall Apart, would definitely agree with you. Though this may be an extreme example, many Christian missionaries in Central America use "Teaching English" in Christian schools for the poor as bait to lure in new converts (whether or not these locals internalize their views or just pretend to for the sake of English education). The Muslims in West Africa are just as bad condemning local indigenous religious ceremonies (like the masking dances and festivals of the Yoruba, Fon, Ewe). They complain about all the iconography, which is taboo to their beliefs. Oh well, missionaries suck in general. |
| Hojucandy wrote: |
| if missionaries really did spread liove and understanding that would be great - but they don't. they spread division and guilt. they are no better than the kkk. |
I can understand where you are coming from, even though I'm a Christian who takes my faith pretty seriously. I don't enjoy being yelled at on the street, and I don't see why anyone else should get a kick out of it either. TV evangelists make me cringe, and most church stuff puts me to sleep.
Still, the message of Christianity is a great one: you are loved, you are forgiven, you can overcome hatred and fear in your life, there's a plan for your life, etc. This is something that has to be lived, not just broadcast. If evangelists didn't wear suits and walked around feeding the hungry, if they mowed your lawn instead of ringing the doorbell to push pamplets into your hands, I think this message would be clearer and better received.
It's true that the Christian message can rock a culture, and the story of the Igbo people in Nigeria as told by Chinua Achebe is a heartbreaking one. It was horrible to read about communities divided, and how Christianity became a tool of colonization. However, there can certainly be positive effects... for example, even according to Achebe we see that Christianity gained ground in stamping out the superstitious murders of twin babies. In India, under the Hindu caste system, one must live, work, and marry within the confines of a caste. Converts to Christianity are free from these societal shackles, and thus it's a step to a more egalitarian society.
I've met heaps of men and women who commit themselves to caring for some really lost young people in my city-- kids who are born into brutal circumstances, sucked into gangs, drugs and prostitution. When these kids meet someone who genuinely cares about them, helps them with their homework, gives them a place to stay when their parents are drunk and violent, I think it's fair to say they are "spreading love and understanding," and don't deserve to be compared to the KKK. The men and women I've known do it out of love, because they're inspired by the love they get from God.
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
What's funny to me is how the protestant missionaries are trying to convert the catholics in Latin America (Ultimate irony on many levels). Funny stuff. Sad really. |
If you're against missionaries in general, then the point I'm about to make is unimportant. However, I thought it was worthwhile to point out that in Latin America, the difference between Protestant and Catholic goes well beyond the usual quibbles over saints and sacraments. My father returned from a trip last year with some amazing stories about how flimsily the Catholic trappings were laid atop nature worship religions like Yoruba. Here's some background info on Yoruba:
In addition to the worship of one God, named Olodumare, the Yoruba worship dozens of deities known as "Orishas" who are personified aspects of nature and spirit. The principal orishas include Eleggua, Oggun, Ochosi, Obatala, Yemaya, Oshun, Shango, Oya, Babalu Aiye, and Orula.
Orisha worship was spread to the new world through the slave trade. In order to preserve their religious traditions against Catholic repression, the African slaves syncretized the orishas with Catholic saints. Thus Shango came to be depicted as Sta. Barbara; Obatala as Our Lady of Mercy, etc. The religion took deep hold in African communities in Brazil and Cuba especially, and eventually spread to mixed race and European-American communities in these countries. After the Cuban revolution of 1959 the religion, known in Spanish as Santeria or La Regla de Ocha, spread to the United States (especially New York City and Florida), Puerto Rico and Venezuela.
Maybe it's not as ironic when you look at what is mingled with Catholicism in the Americas, and you can understand why Protestant missionaries would be concerned, even if you don't agree with their beliefs or practises. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
noelinkorea
Joined: 09 Apr 2003 Location: Shinchon, Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:15 am Post subject: my view |
|
|
There is a rather annoying crossed-eyed middle-aged woman that often stands outside Yonsei University, where I study. She always manages to spot me when I go across the crossing, and yells out while looking at me (well...she faces me, but she's rather crossed eyed, so I could be wrong...). She yells "Jesus Christ, God bless you!" in English. It frustrates me. Today was the worst.
I am totally against throwing your faith into another's face like that - she literally did this today by the way, obstructing my path briefly. I think you should be able to discover your beliefs and religion yourself.
I heard somewhere, that after the US, Korea has the most number of overseas-bound missionaries...again, very annoying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
People's Front of Judea

Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Location: Seoul. Korea
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:33 am Post subject: Wow! |
|
|
Hello Kermo. Wow. It seems I have a lot of responding to do. I'll try to be more clear.
I agree with the Gospel message about love, being forgiven, and overcoming hate and fear. I also agree it is something best understood through experience and sharing your faith through selfless actions instead of broadcasting a message for others to recognize and immediately agree. Though such behavior can be found in various religious doctrines, I think giving of oneself without asking for anything is a true (at least in my opinion) way to live as a Christian.
You know people who have dedicated themselves to helping lost young people. They spread love and understanding. I agree. I would classify such people as true missionaries of Christ's Word. They give of themselves. Their humble loving example allows people to see how true Christians conduct themselves. It's this appearance of piety of serving others that might attract the admiration from those who feel lost. It is a true Christian's action that might make those without faith ask, "What makes this man or woman tick?" Then, they might ask about their faith. I don't think Hoju Candy or I would throw the truly pious into the same pit as Klansmen. Yet, some missionaries who are hypocritical in the message they give should receive the same derision as those who hate for a living.
Chinua Achebe is only one example of the many cases in which the name of Christianity has been used to unravel the strings of indigenous cultures around the world. This happened during European colonization, American expansionism, and is still happening today. Labels have changed, but the situation remains. I could go off on a tangent and list quite a few specific cases where other cultures on every continent (except Antarctica thus far) either fell apart from the introduction of Chrstianity, incorporated a new belief system, or actually created a new religion distinct from the old indigenous beliefs and Christian concepts. Yet, that would take a bit of time. If your really interested in such topics, send me a PM, and I'll be happy to share sources with you and learn something new from you in the process. Anyway, do you think the atrosities done in the Lord's name actually undo a truly Christian message? I don't. There's good to be found, but a lot of bad exists as well. Maybe it gets more attention than the good works.
You also mentioned there can certainly be positive effects from the adoption of Christianity in order parts of the world. There is truth in this statement and the examples that you gave (ending the murder of twins in Africa and giving impoverished people a chance to succeed in India in the Western sense of economic security as success). Yet, arguing that point delves into the realm of cultural relativity, which is always a helluva long discussion maybe not best suited for this forum. Then again, maybe it is. Anyway, again I offer you to PM me so we could discuss such issues without taking up too much of Dave's bandwidth.
I don't think your point about missionaries is unimportant. This is where I should have been more clear about missionaries. There are some people who go to other countries to help to disadvantaged. By their example of help without the expectation of anything in return, they may attract people who might be interested in learning about and maybe adopting Christian ways and beliefs without coersion. I don't hate these missionaries, because they are not false. They would help someone just because they are human. I do hate those who take advantage of the situation and use coersion (we will give you this if you profess faith in our Lord). What is the opposite implication of such action? If you don't profess our beliefs, we will take the help away. That's selfish. That's requiring reciprocity, which sounds like economics more than belief in a benevolent God.
I absolutely love the fact that you briefly pointed out to me differences between Catholic and Protestant rituals and cosmology. Great work. It's rare that I meet anyone who knows about the shrines and dieties/saints of African diaspora religions in the New World. It's such a small field of study.
I think you misinterpreted my examples (protestants missionizing catholics, etc.) as bashing the protestants in support of the catholics or some other religion. I even thought about this interpretation when I was writing the last post. I should have given an example of catholics doing the same thing (and trust me, there are so many examples, even contemporarily) so it would not seem that I am biased toward any particular version of Christendom. Oh well.
You listed the orishas. It's so cool that you know about them. Did you study about them at uni, or did your father tell you about them from his trips??? I studied the orishas and their saint names equivalents from different sects in the Caribbean (Cuba, Grenada, and Trinidad) as well as the Brazilian version of orishas found in Candomble. Are you familiar with their "loa" equivalents in Haitian Voodoo and New Orleans Hoodoo??? It's interesting stuff, at least for me. I actually wrote 3 directed study papers on the topic back in college. I took some weird classes in my junior and senior year. Don't even get me started on Postmodernism and Metaphysics. Sheessh!
Anyway, I see your point about Protestant concern about inadvertantly creating new diaspora religions as happened under Catholicism within various European colonial cultures. Actually, there is a religion whose parents are Protestant Christianity and indigenous Western African religious beliefs. It's called Alamare if memory serves.
Last point, you seem to believe I don't agree with the beliefs or practices of Protestant missionaries. I do and I don't. If a woman or man conducts themselves as a true missionary, one of love and not coercion, then yes I agree with their beliefs and practices. If a man or woman acts like a jackass in the Lord's name, no I don't agree with their beliefs and practices.
Now, can you figure out if I am Christian or not, or does it really matter for the purpose of this subject?
Anyway, if the catholic or protestant churches in general start serving crab burgers and show Sponge Bob Square Pants movies, I might consider showing up. What I am talking about, of course I'll be there! Those crab burgers are might tasty! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alias

Joined: 24 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Last night on the train, a Korean bloke asked me if he could ask me a couple of questions about teaching in Korea. I said sure, why not...and then as we sat down in the train, he bloody well pulled out a bible. I said "mate, I am not religous at all. Why are you reading from the bible, you asked me to talk about teaching in Korea, not Jesus". He looked at me like I was crazy and said "Well in Korea, you have to believe in Jesus to teach English"....
|
Many Koreans seem to assume that if you're white than you must be Christian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
guangho

Joined: 19 Jan 2005 Location: a spot full of deception, stupidity, and public micturation and thus unfit for longterm residency
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alias wrote: |
| Quote: |
Last night on the train, a Korean bloke asked me if he could ask me a couple of questions about teaching in Korea. I said sure, why not...and then as we sat down in the train, he bloody well pulled out a bible. I said "mate, I am not religous at all. Why are you reading from the bible, you asked me to talk about teaching in Korea, not Jesus". He looked at me like I was crazy and said "Well in Korea, you have to believe in Jesus to teach English"....
|
Many Koreans seem to assume that if you're white than you must be Christian. |
Amen to that.
Hojucandy, I prepped an interview with the right reverend falwell for a Jewish AM talkshow once. He is an interesting lad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gollum
Joined: 04 Sep 2003 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:24 am Post subject: Re: Crab-burgers after the sermon!!!!! |
|
|
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
I want to join the Church of Sponge Bob, especially if we get those delicious crab-burgers after the sermon!!!!!
Hey Hoju Candy, in the Church of Sponge Bob when one gets baptized, does the new church member get immerged out of the water for a few seconds?????? Ha ha!!!
Let��s see, why should evangelism be illegal? Jaganath 69 ��hit the nail on the head�� mentioning the slippery slope that comes with freedom of expression. Yet, I understand Hoju Candy��s disgust with Christians who evangelize their religion. Maybe there should be some national service like people use back home to block telemarketers from constantly harassing them on the phone at home. Maybe we could put signs in our front yard that read: No venders and evangelizers allowed. That might ��hair-lip the pope!��
It��s a tough call. Personally, I don��t want to be rude to overzealous Christians who want to share their faith, but sometimes I am really not in the mood for it. Okay, I am never in the mood for it. I feel that those who do this are no better than unscrupulous salespeople who take advantage of one��s manners to give a sales pitch. In my opinion, it��s unethical. Yet, they do it in their Lord��s name. Yeah Hoju Candy, evangelists make me sick too. I wish there were some way to halt their unwelcoming intrusions into our lives here and at home for their self-serving purposes and agendas, but making it illegal makes me hear the faint pitter patter of goosesteps not too far away.
To Hoju Candy, I��m sorry to hear about your friend ending it. That��s sad. Unfortunately, it��s true that Christianity can be a ��guilt trip.�� Shakuhachi��s comments made me remember what it was like to be raised as a Christian. Your cousin demeaned you for playing D&D. Yeah, I got that too. Your post made me remember the KISS concert in New Orleans back in the late 80��s. As we drove to the UNO arena, there were zealous Christians with myriad signs condemning to hell anyone who would stoop so low as to see the Knights In Service of Satan. What a bunch of cretins. That concert Rocked! I have seen them three times since. I didn��t turn out to be a rapist serial killer, but I am teaching English, so maybe they were right in some small way, ��Listen to KISS, teach in ESL Purgatory forever!��
Shakuhachi��s right that the actions of the overzealous are enough to turn people away from Christianity. There is a big difference between the message in the Gospel books to be decent to people (Whether strangers, different, or whatever), where the Pauline Letters that comprise most of the New Testament tend to clamp down on Jesus�� message to love your neighbor and not judge. From the Pauline letters, and latter pseudo-Pauline letters, it seems like Christians are authorized to condemn to hell anyone who does not follow their version derived from a 1st century B.C. Mediterranean culture. Thus people of any other faith, no faith, or homosexuals are condemned to hell. It��s almost like a Panthermodern��s subway version of Christianity (sorry, I couldn��t resist http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=33544). It seems a bit paranoid and dark, when perhaps it would be a bit more fun if it were more inclusive and loving (the religion, not the subway, ha ha!).
I really get turned off by those who come to you to talk about religion, make the personal connection, then start judging everything you do that is not ��Christian�� in their eyes. (I just realized in hindsight that my paragraphs above are somewhat doing what I so readily condemn here, yikes! Okay, hypocrite at large, get a net!) Anyway, it is one of the reasons I don��t go to church, oh and the fact that I am lazy! Back home, I felt that the closer most church going Christians got into my life, the more confining, judgmental, and difficult it was to remain friends with them. Eventually, I wanted to tell them to get bent. Instead, I just made myself less and less available.
I agree with On the Other Hand about discussing religion in class. When the topic comes up, I really enjoy hearing the student��s comments on religion. I have found that though most of my students are Protestant (Mainly Presbyterian I believe), they seem to be inclusive of the Catholic and Buddhist classmates and vice versa. They don��t seem to condemn each other. I like that. I also like talking about the similarities/differences between the three Abrahamic faiths as well as other religions and social philosophies. The tenets of all these doctrines seem to offer good advice on treating each other well. Yet, the way many people practice such doctrines in the world (combining it with economic, political, and racial agendas to the nth degree) is shameful. Pushing it on people is even worse. Anyway, I like to discuss religious topics with students and friends on occasion, but I try to never condemn or condone any particular faith over another. In my opinion, that��s when one steps into the ugly world of evangelizing, unless it's sanctioned by the Church of Sponge Bob. There are crab burgers involved!
Ya Bum Suk said that people should not mind having their religious beliefs (or lack there of) critiqued if they place them on the verbal table. Well said. It can actually lead to some understanding rather than more division. For example, do a search for Sephardic Jewry in Andalusia (Spain) and/or look for the Golden Age under Muslim Caliphates. There were some good exchanges of poetry, wine, and fun debauchery between Muslim, Jewish, and Christian scholars.
Ya-ta Boy and Kermo, amen . . . jalapeno! Let��s go to the subway, break out the mason jars with strychnine and the holy box of rattlers and do a good ole fashioned holiness dance for our Korean bretheren! Just a little peril. Who knows, maybe there will be some crab burgers too! |
It's important to look at what Paul was before he was Paul. His job. His life. His obsession with perfection. That personality carried over when he changed sides. We should not all be like Paul. Nor would Jesus expect us to be.
The Bible must be read from a psychological standpoint, as well. Unlike Jesus, the disciples were merely men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
People's Front of Judea

Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Location: Seoul. Korea
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:33 pm Post subject: The paradox of Paul |
|
|
| Gollum wrote: |
| It's important to look at what Paul was before he was Paul. His job. His life. His obsession with perfection. That personality carried over when he changed sides. We should not all be like Paul. Nor would Jesus expect us to be. |
Good point about Paul. Yet, his perspective on "How to be Christian" is always a paradox for me. Here is a view focusing more on the social ramifications of Jesus' teachings rather than the spiritual interpretation (which of course can be interrelated). The patriarchal household model of Jewish society became so constrained by the laws found in Deuteronomy and the commandments of Genesis (if I remember correctly), this led to a caste-like system where all business dealings and most social relationships were conducted between certain groups. Groups outside the recognized castes (Pharisee, Levite, and others) were considered subhuman or unclean. The Teacher, Jesus, announced He was the Word replacing the Law, which some interpret as love or hospitality replacing the laws derived from the Pentateuch, thus people could be kind and human to those outside their group (What a concept). The story of the Good Samaritan plays a key role in following one's heart to help others instead of passing by a "subhuman" person in need with a clear conscious since the laws seem to imply "It's okay." So, this teaching sprouted into many forms of a new religion.
The many forms 100 years after the death and (if you're Christian) the resurrection of Christ, included gnostics (to know) where some believed the resurrection was only in the spiritual sense while others believed it in the physical bodily sense. Others incorporated previous beliefs of divination into their new religion, some incorporated what seems to be a rather Zoroastrian belief that good and evil (God and the Devil) were equally powerful and had there own domains, while others simply followed the teachings of Christ to be decent to people. There were prayer groups led by women or by people in the utmost egalitarian sense, while others believed anyone could have direct knowing of God through dreams or waking trances, thus people began to write books (like the Gnostic Gospels) like those eventually incorporated under the fledging Catholic church much later. So, Christendom was spouting off in many directions. Enter Peter and Paul.
Paul basically used the patriarchal household model of Judasim to establish the new churches around the Mediterrean. His letters to these churches informed members how to live as a Christian (what's acceptable and what's not). In doing so, other fledgling forms of Christianity were stamped out (like the gnostics) to somewhat consolidate power so this new religion could function and grow instead of splinter itself into a million different versions of itself (which ironically has happened today with the myriad versions of Christianity that have popped up since Martin Luther implied it was okay for people to interpret the scripture without an intermediary from the church, thus voila, variety). So, Paul was necessary to give structure to the new churches.
I see Paul as necessary to give some guidance to new churches so they don't stray to far from core themes and beliefs. Yet it seems troublesome to me that Christian interpretation of the laws, given or shaped by Paul, seemingly try to replace the Word of love and hospitality for the sake of church stability. Jesus was the Word replacing the law, where Paul seems to bring the law back repalcing the Word to not hate everyone different from you. It's a paradox for me, where others might see it as working smoothly together.
So, I think I understand the social ramifications of Paul's mission to guide the new churches. Yet, a lot of his teachings directly or indirectly influence those cretins who would judge and chastise others, instead of merely being loving and understanding. I think the Pauline part of the New Testament actually gives license to those overzealous louts who scream about Jesus to us on the sidewalk. In my opinion, those who scream "Jesus" at foreigners, or those who go on missions overseas to condemn other belief systems and offer help in extortive ways have completely forgotten the message in the Gospels that is sometimes overshadowed by the Pauline letters.
| Gollum wrote: |
| The Bible must be read from a psychological standpoint, as well. Unlike Jesus, the disciples were merely men. |
Another good point, but could you expand on what you mean by a psychological standpoint. I'm not sure if you are talking about a social standpoint (ramifications like those I mentioned above), the personal psychological standpoint of Paul and how that influences Christians, or the psychological standpoint of Christians in general.
Anyway, good points. Paul is always a paradox for me. How do you see the teachings of the Gospels and Paul's teachings as working together? I appreciate your insight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
endofthewor1d

Joined: 01 Apr 2003 Location: the end of the wor1d.
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
anyone see that guy who hangs out outside of burger king in itaewon with the guitar singing about jesus? he's a hoot.
i was walking past one day when the little korean lacky he had with him called out my name.
whoa...
then i recognised him as the guy who lived in my neighborhood and regularly tried to get me to go to his church... especially if i ever came down with a terminal illness, because the preacher there could easily cure it.
anyway... this is a nice enough guy, and he knows full well that i don't buy into his crap, so i stopped to talk to him for a bit. i noticed he was carrying a sign which said:
g-e-o-r-g-e 6
w-a-l-k-e-r 6
b-u-s-h-j-r 6
no matter what you may feel about the man, you must admit this sign was a bit of a stretch.
so i told this guy as much, and i asked him why he was carrying such a silly sign. he said that he and the jesus minstrel worked together, and he had asked him to hold up the sign. he looked a little embarrassed by it all. i kind of feel for the guy. i really think his heart is in the right place, but i really think he needs to find a more effective medium of expressing his genuine good will.
i think his best bet would be to stop trying so hard. just being a nice guy and leading a good and honest life is enough.
how many people do you think really have a change of heart when they walk past the jesus minstrel anyway? i'd guess it would be about equal to the number of people who see the warning on a pack of cigarettes and say 'holy crap! these are bad for me!' |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Plume D'ella Plumeria
Joined: 10 Jan 2005 Location: The Lost Horizon
|
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:58 pm Post subject: Evangelizing |
|
|
I am very seriously contemplating putting a sign on my front door saying something to the effect that religious evangelizers are not welcome. Someone joked about it in an earlier post, but it's something I had been mulling over. I had two sets of callers last Sunday. One set consisted of two women and a baby (was the baby along as cute-bait??). The others were Jehovah's Witnesses. Whenever I see these folks at the door, I always shake my head and tell them no thank you. Then, the one who can speak some English (there alwsys seems to be one in the crowd) invariably asks where I'm from (opening gambit for the upcoming conversion conversation). Whatever you do, never answer that question or any other. You'll just dig yourself in. Don't even give them half a chance to start spouting the lambs-and-flocks pap. I usually just no thank them again and begin closing the door. Sometimes, I scowl to lend credence to my words. I have decided that in the future, I simply will not answer the door to anyone I am not expecting. If they keep pounding and shouting, I'll simply outwait them. I'm very good at waiting. But if this doesn't work, I may yet put up that sign.
Or maybe I should get a religious tract on Buddhism printed up in Korean, whip open the door and slap it into their palms the next time some pal-of-Jesus sort with a toothy grin raps at my door.
Growl..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zenpickle
Joined: 06 Jan 2004 Location: Anyang -- Bisan
|
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2005 1:55 am Post subject: Re: Wow! |
|
|
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
Hello Kermo. Wow. It seems I have a lot of responding to do. I'll try to be more clear.
I agree with the Gospel message about love, being forgiven, and overcoming hate and fear. I also agree it is something best understood through experience and sharing your faith through selfless actions instead of broadcasting a message for others to recognize and immediately agree. Though such behavior can be found in various religious doctrines, I think giving of oneself without asking for anything is a true (at least in my opinion) way to live as a Christian.
|
In my experience with Christianity and other religions, institutions and concepts, there's a positive side and a dark side. Christianity is great when it attracts people through hope and love. But the weak-minded (IMHO) tend to be attracted to the dark side of Christianity, which scares people into joining.
I don't want to go into detail, but really just to add to the ethos of where I'm coming from, I used to be heavily into Christianity and was even involved in a cult at one time and for a while was an evangelistic preacher. That was a long, long time ago, and I'm a lot different now than I was then. But it helps to have that past to understand where people come from that are just plain overzealous.
Nonetheless, they annoy the crapola out of me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yaya

Joined: 25 Feb 2003 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The only time I don't mind when people show their religion is when they actually practice what they preach and help someone. I'm getting into Buddhism and had no idea that it emphasizes compassion for all beings and such. I hear that a Taiwanese Buddhist order run mainly by nuns is at the forefront of the tsunami relief effort, and unlike many religious charities, all they do is do relief work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kermo

Joined: 01 Sep 2004 Location: Eating eggs, with a comb, out of a shoe.
|
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:35 am Post subject: Re: Wow! |
|
|
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
Chinua Achebe is only one example of the many cases in which the name of Christianity has been used to unravel the strings of indigenous cultures around the world. This happened during European colonization, American expansionism, and is still happening today. Labels have changed, but the situation remains. I could go off on a tangent and list quite a few specific cases where other cultures on every continent (except Antarctica thus far) either fell apart from the introduction of Chrstianity, incorporated a new belief system, or actually created a new religion distinct from the old indigenous beliefs and Christian concepts. Yet, that would take a bit of time. If your really interested in such topics, send me a PM, and I'll be happy to share sources with you and learn something new from you in the process. Anyway, do you think the atrosities done in the Lord's name actually undo a truly Christian message? I don't. There's good to be found, but a lot of bad exists as well. Maybe it gets more attention than the good works.
You also mentioned there can certainly be positive effects from the adoption of Christianity in order parts of the world. There is truth in this statement and the examples that you gave (ending the murder of twins in Africa and giving impoverished people a chance to succeed in India in the Western sense of economic security as success). Yet, arguing that point delves into the realm of cultural relativity, which is always a helluva long discussion maybe not best suited for this forum. Then again, maybe it is. Anyway, again I offer you to PM me so we could discuss such issues without taking up too much of Dave's bandwidth.
I absolutely love the fact that you briefly pointed out to me differences between Catholic and Protestant rituals and cosmology. Great work. It's rare that I meet anyone who knows about the shrines and dieties/saints of African diaspora religions in the New World. It's such a small field of study.
You listed the orishas. It's so cool that you know about them. Did you study about them at uni, or did your father tell you about them from his trips??? I studied the orishas and their saint names equivalents from different sects in the Caribbean (Cuba, Grenada, and Trinidad) as well as the Brazilian version of orishas found in Candomble. Are you familiar with their "loa" equivalents in Haitian Voodoo and New Orleans Hoodoo??? It's interesting stuff, at least for me. I actually wrote 3 directed study papers on the topic back in college. I took some weird classes in my junior and senior year. Don't even get me started on Postmodernism and Metaphysics. Sheessh! |
Hello Judean People's Front! Oh, I'm sorry, I mean, People's Front of Judea. Sorry it took me so long to reply. You're right-- we do have a lot to talk about, but I'm sure you'd have more to tell me than I would be able to share with you. I've studied the Bible, and pursued a deeper understanding of world religions as a hobby, but I've never studied at a university level. Often, when I have questions about church history, or sticky theological matters, I consult my father or sister, both of whom have impressive credentials in the respective fields. I hate to disappoint, but I can't claim to know anything about Yoruba-- I recalled the name and cut'n'pasted (I didn't mean to take credit for that info, which is why I put it in bold.) I wouldn't mind getting into any of these topics in more depth, though... perhaps over a hot chocolate at Starbucks?
You make some important points about mission work, and the agendas that can accompany it. I think that relief work should be quite separate from mission work, and that the message of the Gospel should never be packaged with cultural trappings. This sort of thing seems really obvious to me, and it's painful to watch people exploiting the needs of others, or compromising the cultures they are involved in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yu_Bum_suk

Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:22 am Post subject: Re: The paradox of Paul |
|
|
| People's Front of Judea wrote: |
| Gollum wrote: |
| It's important to look at what Paul was before he was Paul. His job. His life. His obsession with perfection. That personality carried over when he changed sides. We should not all be like Paul. Nor would Jesus expect us to be. |
Good point about Paul. Yet, his perspective on "How to be Christian" is always a paradox for me. Here is a view focusing more on the social ramifications of Jesus' teachings rather than the spiritual interpretation (which of course can be interrelated). The patriarchal household model of Jewish society became so constrained by the laws found in Deuteronomy and the commandments of Genesis (if I remember correctly), this led to a caste-like system where all business dealings and most social relationships were conducted between certain groups. Groups outside the recognized castes (Pharisee, Levite, and others) were considered subhuman or unclean. The Teacher, Jesus, announced He was the Word replacing the Law, which some interpret as love or hospitality replacing the laws derived from the Pentateuch, thus people could be kind and human to those outside their group (What a concept). The story of the Good Samaritan plays a key role in following one's heart to help others instead of passing by a "subhuman" person in need with a clear conscious since the laws seem to imply "It's okay." So, this teaching sprouted into many forms of a new religion.
The many forms 100 years after the death and (if you're Christian) the resurrection of Christ, included gnostics (to know) where some believed the resurrection was only in the spiritual sense while others believed it in the physical bodily sense. Others incorporated previous beliefs of divination into their new religion, some incorporated what seems to be a rather Zoroastrian belief that good and evil (God and the Devil) were equally powerful and had there own domains, while others simply followed the teachings of Christ to be decent to people. There were prayer groups led by women or by people in the utmost egalitarian sense, while others believed anyone could have direct knowing of God through dreams or waking trances, thus people began to write books (like the Gnostic Gospels) like those eventually incorporated under the fledging Catholic church much later. So, Christendom was spouting off in many directions. Enter Peter and Paul.
Paul basically used the patriarchal household model of Judasim to establish the new churches around the Mediterrean. His letters to these churches informed members how to live as a Christian (what's acceptable and what's not). In doing so, other fledgling forms of Christianity were stamped out (like the gnostics) to somewhat consolidate power so this new religion could function and grow instead of splinter itself into a million different versions of itself (which ironically has happened today with the myriad versions of Christianity that have popped up since Martin Luther implied it was okay for people to interpret the scripture without an intermediary from the church, thus voila, variety). So, Paul was necessary to give structure to the new churches.
I see Paul as necessary to give some guidance to new churches so they don't stray to far from core themes and beliefs. Yet it seems troublesome to me that Christian interpretation of the laws, given or shaped by Paul, seemingly try to replace the Word of love and hospitality for the sake of church stability. Jesus was the Word replacing the law, where Paul seems to bring the law back repalcing the Word to not hate everyone different from you. It's a paradox for me, where others might see it as working smoothly together.
So, I think I understand the social ramifications of Paul's mission to guide the new churches. Yet, a lot of his teachings directly or indirectly influence those cretins who would judge and chastise others, instead of merely being loving and understanding. I think the Pauline part of the New Testament actually gives license to those overzealous louts who scream about Jesus to us on the sidewalk. In my opinion, those who scream "Jesus" at foreigners, or those who go on missions overseas to condemn other belief systems and offer help in extortive ways have completely forgotten the message in the Gospels that is sometimes overshadowed by the Pauline letters.
| Gollum wrote: |
| The Bible must be read from a psychological standpoint, as well. Unlike Jesus, the disciples were merely men. |
Another good point, but could you expand on what you mean by a psychological standpoint. I'm not sure if you are talking about a social standpoint (ramifications like those I mentioned above), the personal psychological standpoint of Paul and how that influences Christians, or the psychological standpoint of Christians in general.
Anyway, good points. Paul is always a paradox for me. How do you see the teachings of the Gospels and Paul's teachings as working together? I appreciate your insight. |
He was also a pharasaical scholar influenced by Platonic notions of the eternity of the soul. But what percentage of people publicly expresssing their religious beliefs would be able to provide any coment on that? And what would they think if you told them that to the extent you felt it mattered, you're more interested in researching the philology and text criticism of his epistles than hearing about their personal relationship with Jesus and how they can quote St Paul out of context in a Living Bible paraphrase? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Yu_Bum_suk

Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yaya wrote: |
| The only time I don't mind when people show their religion is when they actually practice what they preach and help someone. I'm getting into Buddhism and had no idea that it emphasizes compassion for all beings and such. I hear that a Taiwanese Buddhist order run mainly by nuns is at the forefront of the tsunami relief effort, and unlike many religious charities, all they do is do relief work. |
Even they practice what they preach, why would you want to listen to them if an incredibly high percentage of them don't know what the hell they're talking about? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|